Is God Perfect?

[ThisYouWillDo]

If we deny words a common, precise meaning, how can we consider the question at all? Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muß man schweigen.

[TomOfSweden]

If we deny words a common, precise meaning, how can we consider the question at all? Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muß man schweigen.

I'd argue that abstract words are very valuable. The whole point with abstract words is that they are containers to be filled with meaning. They are like variables in programming. A very powerful tool.

It only becomes a problem when the content of the container is erroneously inferred.

According to the linguist Stephen Pinker we cannot actually imagine anything abstract and will always see everything as concrete. So when we talk about it we translate it from the abstract to concrete and then the receiver needs to do the opposite for it to make any sense.

Compare it to talking about a car. If I say, "You will be able to transport the garden table in your car". I always have one image of a car in my mind which I fit the table in, while you in your head will have another image of a car which you are trying to fit the same table into. If it won't fit in your image you'll have to think of another concrete car in which it will fit. This is not a problem with the abstract word "car", this is a strength. One word, ("car") can mean any car which saves a lot of time and energy.

The word "god" is the exact same thing. If I say "god listens to your prayers", I have imagined a concrete physical way I'm effected by that god, and also a concrete way I'm praying and for these words to be transferred. It may not be conscious, but we all do it. It needs to be translated to a physical way you feel when there is god-human contact.

"God" has not been given a common precise meaning for Christians so no Christian knows they are talking about the same god as another when they are referring to this abstract entity. I think they are on purpose avoiding this because it will create a stronger perceived unity between Christians. It's a bit like a national flag. We all try our hardest to keep the symbol as free as possible from anything concrete. It's all rubbish like "the land of the free" and other abstract expressions. This may be a very powerful reason, and even very positive. But we shouldn't work backward from this and start assuming that just because many people stand behind the same symbol, that the symbol symbolises the same thing for each supporter.

This is why reasoning about any concrete physical properties of god always will fail. Thomas Aquinas has taken this and run with it as far as we could, and it didn't go very well.